zlacker

Because they are protests against the police, and the police don't like that? Simplest answer I can see

>>darker+(OP)
Use of force by police in those protests results in more protests.

So the simplest answer is actually: protesters benefit from police using force. (because they'll get more protesters, more media coverage etc.)

>>krzyk+jb
> So the simplest answer is actually: protesters benefit from police using force.

I'm struggling to see the equivalency here. In one case you have cops, getting paid to protect people and property and ignoring that responsibility (or actually participating in mayhem) at no cost to themselves. Lots of incentive to act poorly, little personal consequence.

On the other hand you have protestors who might collectively benefit from police using force at the cost of taking a club to the head or pepper spray to the face.

Not seeing how the two are comparable.

>>krzyk+jb
The goal of the protesters is not to have more protests. I'm pretty sure they'd rather stay at home and do something fun. The goal of the protesters is to stop police violence. So the police using force is the exact opposite of what the protesters want.

>>krzyk+jb
People in large groups typically don't exhibit intelligent coordinated behavior taking advantage of second order effects without training and coordination. Soldiers in battle require training to maintain formation in violent circumstances even though that's in their advantage as a group. It sounds like you may have a blind spot based on a preconceived notion here.

>>darker+qY1
Yes, I get that, but protests are rarely spontaneously created, they are organized by someone or some group of people.